Oh no, President Bush is a liberal left wing illegal alien apologist, aiding and abetting the enemy? Although I am no fan of President Bush’s, I wonder, how do all the Republicans get past this idea of “compassionate conservatism” as it relates to illegal immigration? In this most recent article, the Washington Post demonstratesthat President Bush clearly sees the future of the Republican party on the precipice of a downward spiral unless a new inclusive dynamic is implemented.
President Bush called for a “compassionate” Republican Party and warned against the GOP becoming “anti-immigrant” in one of his last interviews as president, defending his vision of the party, which has become unpopular among some Republicans.
“It’s very important for our party not to narrow its focus, not to become so inward-looking that we drive people away from a philosophy that is compassionate and decent,” the president said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday” that was aired yesterday. “We shouldn’t have litmus tests as to whether or not you can be a Republican. And we should be open-minded about big issues like immigration reform, because if we’re viewed as anti-somebody — in other words, if the party is viewed as anti-immigrant — then another fellow may say, ‘Well, if they’re against the immigrant, they may be against me.’ ”
I do find it interesting that he does not see his legacy or behavior as complicit in the overwhelming loss of the GOP in so many 2008 races….the wars, the Katrina fiasco, failed energy innovation, the economy, shall I go on! Alas, this is the topic for another thread, let’s just concentrate of immigration for now. With this gem recently written by the President of the Center for Immigration Study (arm of FAIR), Mark Krikorian, it is clear the underlying issue with immigration is NOT about illegality, but instead simply about immigration from central America:
For too long the Republican story line has been “Too Much Lawbreaking,” when instead the real problem is “Too Much Immigration” — only one part of which involves lawbreaking. This exclusive focus on illegal immigration — opposing amnesty and pushing for more enforcement — is both incomplete and counterproductive. Incomplete because the effects of illegal immigration aren’t that different from those of legal immigration — an illiterate Central American farmer with a green card is just as unsuited for a 21st-century economy as an illiterate Central American farmer without a green card. And it’s counterproductive because the focus on criminality can seem punitive and serve to polarize the debate, potentially aliening not just immigrant voters, who really aren’t that numerous, but the native-born, who want less immigration but don’t want to feel bad about themselves for holding such a view.
Elena, this is the most cogent and complete essay you have posted on this blog. My esteem for your insight and ability to dissect complex issues and confounding obfuscation is growing each time I check in to this blog.
In a sentence: your post is “game, set, and match” for the immigration debate.
For the partisan who saw the issue as a way to win elections, there is no longer a path forward with this issue. We’ve known this since Nov. 4.
But by adding the quote from FAIR, you’ve blocked the only other path for the anti-immigrant lobbyist who wishes to maintain intellectual and moral integrity.
After the defeat of 2008, FAIR has abandoned its ingenious conflation of immigration and legal paperwork, and has invited the nation to join them in a crusade against ALL immigration … namely immigration from Central America, and certainly also places to the south. They have unmasked themselves, to the chagrin of those who put their faith in them, and now cater only to those who would join a Hate Group without apology … the tiniest minority of all in 21st century America.
So for the formerly faithful anti-illegal immigrant activist, the ball is in your court. Will you continue to follow FAIR, and accept their “research” and rumor as Gospel and/or fact? Or, will you join the rest of the Republican party, as we move to the middle, and leave behind a shameful disease for which reform is the only cure?
Well, if Bush says the Republican party needs to abandon it’s conservative principles, it must be true, right? After all, he’s been right about so many other things! “Well, if they’re against the immigrant, they might be against me.” Yep, Bush is a genius. In my best Wile E Coyote: “George W Bush….suuuper geeenius!”
You’ve got WhyHereWhyNow sold……but she believes in the Easter Bunny, too.
But did YOU vote for him, Slow? ‘Fess up now.
I thought W said it quite well, actually, because he knows he is right. Admittedly, Bush does not have many ideas of his own, but being philosophically opposed to bigotry is a conviction to which he arrived long before Karl Rove got a hold of him. Rove and Dick Cheney did not indoctrinate this into him … no, not like the the way Mr. Slow on the Uptake has been indoctrinated to ignore the substance and attack the messenger, time and time again.
Anything to say on the substance of this post, Mr. Slow On The Uptake? Give it a try. It wouldn’t kill ya! Or if you’re going to leave at the pathetic attempt at a retort above, could you please refrain from using the term “Conservative Principles” in future posts?
Back to W. He is not as dumb as he has been made to sound these past 8 years. Like Sarah Palin, he was over-coached, and, when he is reciting someone else’s words … and isn’t sure if they are accurate or even convincing … he stammers and mangles the language. Most of Bush’s famously absurd sentences were spoken when he was discussing topics in which he has no natural interest. Too bad most of his duties as President fell into this category. But that’s what we get when we elect candidates with no ideas; only convictions, and no interest in policy; only the zero sum game of politics.
But Mr. Slow On The Uptake, that’s two strikes for you. We won’t rebuild the party by attacking minorities, and we won’t rebuild the party by attacking W. Care to venture a third swing at it, or will you be taking all the way? I predict taking all the way.
This is the same philosiphy Sen. John Warner pointed out following the 2007 mid-term elections. The Rep. Party must move more to the center in order to appeal to more moderate and independant voters. As long as the Reps. continue to embrace the extreme right on issues, it will remain a regional party with limited appeal to the overall electorate. Just look at the Red state-Blue state map from last Nov. elections.
MH, I did a lot of stupid things eight years ago, and voting for Bush was one of them. Four years ago was like this past election…the choice was awful and worse than awful, so I stuck to local stuff. Honestly, I think we MAY be witnessing the end of the Republican party. When the so-called leaders of the party openly ignore the party’s published platform, where do you go from there? The centrists won’t be able to win without the right, and the right won’t be able to win without the centrists…..so it’s pretty much dead. But, being a free-market kind of person, if it can’t survive, it must die..maybe to make room for something better and stronger. We shall see!
WHWN, Slow on the uptake….did you think of that all by yourself?
Seriously, I picture Ralphie’s teacher grading his Christmas Theme in his daydream from “A Christmas Story” after reading Elena’s post. “A Plus, Plus, Plus” while dancing around. Good Stuff!
Until the Republican party can shed themselves of the religious right cult faction they will continue to lose elections. Here’s some broadbrushing – they are mostly hypcrites who have declared bankruptcy on a former life and now sit in judgement of everyone else’s life.
Those that are sincere are to be respected – they are not, however overly judgemental or angry, they are at peace with themselves and pray for those with whom they disagree. They don’t want to hurt them. BIG difference and very easy to recognize.
Best analogy I can think of are the abortion clinic bombers. They get all the attention, but don’t have the support of or are representative of those who truly sincerely respect life.
I think Republican, I associate Greg. No thanks.
Elena,
Ah, you found it. Yes that article was very telling wasn’t it. And if I had to chose a paragraph from that article, I would have selected the exact same one.
Very contradicting those two messages, one from Bush encouraging people to be compassionate and the other very clearly stating immigrants are the problem. I’d love to know how Corey Stewart feels about this article.
Hi Alanna,
While I was working on the thread last night, I remembered our conversation earlier, when you told me about “the new and improved immigration message from CIS” and thought what a great polar image it would reflect to President Bush’s “compassionate conservatisim”. Glad you believe I picked the right paragraph!
To the question: “Is Bush an illegal alien aider and abettor?” I would like to say that yes, John Stirrup would say Bush is and he would add that Bush is also an “illegal alien apologist” just like Alanna! However, Stirrup himself, is for the Rule of Law!
I also saw that article by Krikorian before you posted it…and you summed it up well. What a gem indeed. Now the real problem these people have with immigration is being uncovered for what it really is and that is that “an illiterate Central American farmer with a green card is just as unsuited for a 21st-century economy as an illiterate Central American farmer without a green card.” WOW!
My illiterate Central American born husband has fit in quite well in the 21st century economy. Ambitious enough to start his own service business right here in 21st century America! Yes, American’s still require home services. And he has even provided service to some prominent right wing anti immigrant Republican’s siblings! And he even helped produce a so called “gifted” son. Imagine that. Apparently not Krikorian.
Just what is an illegal alien apologist?
Slow, I remember when the Religious Right took over the Republican Party. Many moderate centrists left then because all of a sudden, Republican principles just weren’t good enough. Plus, some of us didn’t want to be embarrassed by the likes of Jerry Falwell, his Moral Majority, or Pat Robertson or any of the other new arrivals who all wanted to out-preach each other.
McCain, despite his faults, might have been able to stop the obvious if he had only reached to the center rather than to the right not only for a running mate but also for a party platform.
The Republican Party has not come to an “end” just because the radical extremist anti-immigrant agenda that you espouse has come met a dead end.
That’s like saying that the United States will come to and “end” because G. W. Bush’s administration is coming to and end.
Both took a very serious hit that will take some time to recover from.
Since you declined to cease your infantile whining because the radical extremist and bigoted agenda you espouse is no longer viable … here’s a clue.
The Republican Party can survive if we repudiate the politics of hate, and do the opposite: build a genuine relationship with religious conservatives. There would have to be a hint of “tough love” here, expressed by Republican leaders and religious leaders who support Republicans, based on political and scientific reality, but also based on Christian values. Religious conservatives are not stupid. They know when they have been lied to. They also know when they have put their trust in a type of politicized proselytizing that is effective for elections, but has no merit in as a secular governing philosophy. Jesus would not be for the oil companies, for instance, war profiteers, or deregulation. The Bush administration talked about Christian values, but it did not practice them, and people are smart enough to know the difference. Karl Rove’s “Permanent Republican Majority” took religious conservatives for granted, thinking they would go along with any policy, no matter how atrocious and inept, as long as we talked about hating abortion and gays during election season.
Saddest of all, certain Republican strategists, some in our own neighborhood, thought the same trick could be played on racists. When F.A.I.R. and NumbersUSA learned how to use email, they realized there was power in a new type of politicized proselytizing that involved incorporating hateful propaganda into Republican talking points and Republican radio and news programs.
This is where the party went off the cliff. For 7 or 8 elections in a row, we allowed any powerful movement to hijack the our platform, no matter how extremist and no matter how bad for this country’s future, as long as it would help win the next election. The combination of corrupt and inept governing from a Republican administration, and the genuflection before a small but vocal minority of racists within the party, has demoralized everyone who hasn’t left the party all together.
Enough of that.
It will take 8 years I predict to dig out of this whole. In the next three elections we must lose with dignity as we show more respect to religious conservatives, and less to anti-immigrant lobbyists and bigots. Top that off with a Bobby Jindal on the top of the ticket against a Mark Warner type of the Democratic side, and you might see the Republican party reborn as an inclusive, social conservative but not hate-mongering party, that is respectful of religious people without capitulating to extremists.
Oh, and Slow Burning Humiliation, I’m glad you are laying off the racist rants on this thread, but your name is itself a racist rant, that’s why I am accepting suggests for your new name. Can anyone beat “Slow Burning Humiliation” or “Slow On The Uptake?”
Can anyone other than me see WHWN coming unhinged in her last post, here?
Bush absolutely did aid and abet, and subvert American law. I don’t expect that he’ll pardon Ramos and Compeon. Maybe he’ll try to pardon all 15 million or however many illegals.
And now we have an America with people so unassimilated that they sell their teenaged daughters for beer and call the police to try to enforce the agreement – http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/13/daughter.for.sale/index.html
Here, WHWN, I found something else for you to lose it over:
http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=9655036&nav=menu33_2
Those racists!!!
Here’s another gem….from the Wash Compost Birdcage Liner no less.
http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=9655036&nav=menu33_2
How could this be?
Slow, no idea. However I would like to get pissed off over the eradicating the southern ladies. I would prefer that my heritage not be totally erased. People dressed like that for many years in many different parts of the country. If it reminds Mr. Vaughn of slavery perhaps he should see a psychiatrist. It reminds me of historic female fancy attire. Maybe I should drop the gender card if he drops the race card.
Rick, other people do things like that also, I am sorry to say. I don’t think you can hang that just on hispanics.
Bush is too busy becoming a last minute conservationist to pardon too many…….
people hated truman also
Let them wear the dresses. If it reminds me of anything it’s Gone With The Wind.
Slowpoke you really are an offensive person. WHWN is basically repeating the same argument that all the moderate Republicans are saying. You are in a bubble, and you don’t even have any arguments to back up your position. What does the Southern dresses have to do with the fact that you want the GOP to go racist for good?
Your beef with WHWN is an obvious case. He feels the hate card can no longer win national elections, so it’s time to find something new. You’d like to keep trying the same thing and expect a different result. Thank God he’s right. We do need the Republicans to become relevant in a positive way, hopefully as a permanent minority party ( = But seriously, they have to back to the business of good government, and help us fix our broken government with proper checks amd balances.
Has her Heinie-ness the Queen fluttered in the bocs meeting yet, dusting all with her presence?
The real problem is people, including the President are soft on “illegal” immigration because of politics and not because of intellectual practicality and need for border control, because they conceptualize it and think of it as “legal” immigration, or just plain immigration issues as a fuzzy, inaccurate abstract.
The bottom line is, the nation has always needed to set an appropriate level of immigration, it has never advocated open borders, and never advocated that an appropriate level of immigration is not needed, and never advocated that controls on the numbers of immigrants coming into the country is not needed.
No country in the world has advocated for such concepts. The only people who want and desire open borders are the friends and families of illegal immigrants and those who care nothing about the consequenses of too many poor people in your country, those who do not care about rampant overpopulation effects and those who only have sympathy for all poor people regardless of the effect of poor people on all other people in a nation.
All nations must have population control, and set an upper limit to the number per year of legal immigrants allowed into a nation, and set a standard for skills that are allowed in a nation over other sets of skills. Once that number has been exceed, all nations need law enforcement to ensure those numbers are not exceeded. That means enforcing laws that remove “illegal” immigrants that far exceed annual quotas for “legal” immigrants into any country.
The President, and everyone else will never get this right, until and unless they can clearly seperate “illegal” immigrant policy and law, from “legal” immigrant policy and law, and ensure legal quotoas are never exceeded.
As long as people abstract this issue as “immigration reform”, which means pardon all people here illegally, the nation cannot and will not ever prevent the consequences of “illegal” immigration from destroying a country, regardless if it makes a specific political party more popular or not.
All “illegal” immigrants and families of “illegal” immigrants will always support either political party that allows them to break the law. Which party will stand up to protect the “innocent” millions adversely and negatively affected by these “illegal” immigrants?
As I have said many times before, Bush is an intellectual idiot. I hope Obama, does not turn out to be so stupid, as this president has been over the past 8 years. I can’t wait until swear-in day!
NGL,
You flatter me, really. I’ve already picked you as the spokesperson for the whole Anti-BVBL agenda. Keep talking, you’re helping me a great deal! The funniest part is to watch folks like you and WHWN commit, over and over and over again, the same sins you constantly accuse everyone else of. Anyone really paying attention can’t miss it.
For all his failings and the mistakes he made one has to give credit to Bush for his position on immigration, aids, and Africa.
I agree, Simon. I think he is a decent man at heart. If only he had led on immigration reform when he still had some credibility, and some political weight. The whole tragedy could have been avoided, and I dare say, the dichotomy between the parties would not be as striking when it comes to where people of color are welcome and where they fear to tread. This is something that Bush saw long ago.
The country is no longer divided between white and non-white. The people younger than me don’t even understand this division. It was the worst thing the Republicans could do for their future to try to target an ethnic minority as an election strategy. As much as Bush was a disappointment when it came to leadership and national security issues, what really did the Republicans in was the hatefulness and divisiveness they exhibited. Somehow, voters forgave them that when September 11th was fresh in their minds, as if fear should naturally give rise to hate and hate politics. But now that we are out of the fog of fear that Bush and Rove so expertly exploited, it’s hard to believe we elected him over a war hero in 2004. Isn’t it hard to believe? And so sad, because of all the needless death and suffering and the collapse of our economy. The list goes on. And we as Americans are as much to blame as the politicians who manipulated us because we voted for him twice.
You are correct NGL. The world needs to get over minority issues, and start thinking only about applying the law the same, regardless of race, religion, gender and ethnicity. A failure to do that by any individual, is to continue the very concepts of racism and ethnic, religious hatred.
You do this by a common umbrella of law, built on democracy and “individual rights only” not group rights, and seperate religion and ethnicity from politics and law, and only protecting “individual” rights to freedom of religion, ethnic tolerance and religious tolereance for “individuals” to self govern.
You do not however give indivduals rights to hurt and harm others based on what race, gender, religion or ethnicity they belong to. You mnust hold individuals who harm others accountable to “legal” behavior and punish all forms of “illegal” behavior regardless of race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
Bush and this administration, the Republicans and even elements of the Democratic party have failed miserably to do this, and that is why our nation is in such political and global chaos.
Simon,
I agree 100%, no other president dedicated more money and resources to help fight AIDS in African than President Bush, he was a compassionate conservative in this regard.
George Bush will be judged by history. In many ways, he cared when no one else did. I have never doubted his sincerity, just perhaps the judgement of those he surrounded himself with. I also never voted for him. However, a small part of me will miss him.
I think Bush will be remembered by a history as an ordinary man faced with extraordinary challenges. He was not qualified to be a public official of any kind, let alone the President. And, his only fault was hubris overcoming self doubt as others propelled him into that tragic position.
Bush would have been much better off doing an ordinary job, something simple. But his misfortune was that he was born into an aristocratic oil family, and his name made him an instant candidate to by the symbol of Republican philosophy (without having the mental capacity to fully grasp what that is).
That’s why you see Republicans at each other’s throats all the time (and on this blog) trying to define what a Republican philosophy should be. For the past 8 years, the leader of the party was being pulled in all directions by much more intelligent and more experienced men. And, his words were incomprehensible on any issue other than militarism, which he basically got scared into by Bin Laden, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. Rove and Cheney made sure that 9/11 became a campaign issue in 2002 and 2004, and of course Iraq was Cheney’s plan long before he bamboozled Bush into picking him for VP.
9/11 played right into Cheney’s diabolical plan.
Remember that before 9/11 Bush spent most of his time on vacation and was happy to leave the “hard work” to ideologues he’d appointed to the White House.
Next thing he knew, smarter and more intelligent men were telling him that he had to be a “War President”, and lie about certain things to make the Iraq war happen.
WHWN,
Thank you for your compliment 🙂
All the extremist conservative velvets are wringing their black velvet hands in fear and prophesying much doom and end of country and home because the dreaded libs and Dems are now in power. Perhaps some of them need to change their own ways and things like this would not happen.
Some were such poor models for conservatives that people wanted as far away from that junk as possible. They will have to live with what they got, reap what they sow.
Elena,
Thanks for linking to this article. It’s very illuminating. Krikorian is a sneaky one.
Slowness, I wonder if you realize that your comments are unintelligible … several comments in a row, in fact. Do you just not have time to think it through before you start typing? Or, are you trying to sound like an idiot to discredit people with Hispanic names? None of us take you for anything other than a person who dislikes Hispanics, so if that’s your aim, you are failing time and time again.
JustinT, I think you are very correct in your comments, history will show it to be very accurate along your descriptions. Those who are “less informed” seem to love Bush for the very few things he has decided based entirely on his “religious” convictions, even when those convictions are “dangerous and destructive” rather than based on his “limited intellect”. His “compassion” though “just” in a very few actions was “strategic blundering” in the very critical decisions of his administration, as history will reveal.